Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Carnivorous Clock Eats Bugs

samzenpus posted more than 5 years ago | from the little-office-of-horrors dept.

Technology 197

Designers James Auger and Jimmy Loizeau have created a clock that is powered by "eating" bugs. The clock traps insects on flypaper stretched across a roller system and then drops them into a vat of bacteria. The insects are then "digested" and the ensuing chemical reaction is transformed into power that keeps the rollers moving and the LCD clock working. The two offer another version that is powered by mice and an even cooler machine that picks insect fuel from spiderwebs with the help of a robotic arm and a video camera.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Bugs? (4, Funny)

bluesatin (1350681) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530297)

I won't be buying a first generation one of these, it's bound to have a tonne of bugs.

Re:Bugs? (2, Interesting)

SSgt. Lagface (1588425) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530547)

I won't be buying a first generation one of these, it's bound to have a tonne of bugs.

Hopefully later generations will have more. My question is, how many bugs will it take to run that thing? I don't know how much power you'd get per bug, but I wouldn't be surprised if it really needed a ton of bugs to keep that thing up for a while.

Re:Bugs? (1)

Serenissima (1210562) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531135)

I know it's a joke, but isn't there really an actual glitch? How consistently can you "drop" something off of flypaper? Isn't the point of flypaper to trap the insects so that they DON'T easily come off?

Re:Bugs? (2, Informative)

Brandee07 (964634) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531603)

It has a scraper to scrape the bugs off of the paper and into the bug-digesting compartment. I guess that would be the stomach?

Re:Bugs? (2, Informative)

Attack DAWWG (997171) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531665)

The bugs are removed with a scraper. Here [newscientist.com] is a pic.

Re:Bugs? (1)

Mursk (928595) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532297)

You can probably remove the bugs pretty easily if you're willing to part with the legs. Probably not much power to be drawn from those, anyway...

Re:Bugs? (5, Funny)

hargrand (1301911) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531943)

Not only that, if this catches on, it'll just be a matter of time before we start running out of bugs in the US and have to start relying on foriegn sources of bugs.

As well as a TON of them.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28532735)

n/t

-Fartnog Buttstinkle

have an order (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28530329)

Could i please have house alarm from same company please?

Cool For now. (4, Funny)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530389)

Until people start hacking these and needs more power. Then starts going for human flesh.

Re:Cool For now. (3, Funny)

pr100 (653298) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530635)

I, for one, welcome our new clock overlords.

Re:Cool For now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28530941)

"time keeping overlords" would have worked better.

Re:Cool For now. (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532173)

We prefer to be called "Time Lords", and keep your grubby hands off my Tardis!

Re:Cool For now. (4, Funny)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531191)

"I had to OC my clock, so I added a butterfly trap to get extra energy."

Re:Cool For now. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531661)

FEED ME SEYMOUR!

Re:Cool For now. (1)

CopaceticOpus (965603) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531805)

Soylent Clock runs on people!

Re:Cool For now. (3, Interesting)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531899)

It's closer than you think. Just consider the disturbingly named 'EATR': http://www.robotictechnologyinc.com/index.php/EATR [robotictechnologyinc.com] Energetically Autonomous Tactical Robot. Strikes me that this 'tactical' robot is one programming glitch away from Robocalypse Now.

It's one small step from a bug... (2, Funny)

nasor (690345) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530457)

...to your laser-blasted skeleton.

umm...why??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28530465)

Now a car that injested all those bugs splattered on the front grill could actually be useful.

Re:umm...why??? (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530529)

The power generated might be enough to run one headlight. But what would really be interesting is capturing some of the speed energy to help charge the battery. But with using wind.

Re:umm...why??? (1)

ID000001 (753578) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530991)

That would be what Regenerative Brakes are designed for. Since Winds is fairly inefficient and actually increase fuel consumption.

Re:umm...why??? (4, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531185)

The power generated might be enough to run one headlight. But what would really be interesting is capturing some of the speed energy to help charge the battery. But with using wind.

I'll do you one better. Attach a sail to the car so that almost all of the "speed" energy is harvested. Fans harvesting electricity from the "wind" generated by the engine propelling the car is less efficient than the engine just making the electricity.

Re:umm...why??? (0, Redundant)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531397)

Might want to check out some physics textbooks and read up on this. The energy 'harvested' by that sail is provided by the internal combustion engine. Yeah, sounds like a great idea at first blush, but when you dig deeper into it, you quickly find out it's not

Re:umm...why??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28532401)

Might want to check out some whoosh and read up on this.

Re:umm...why??? (1)

grx0 (104903) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532349)

The power generated might be enough to run one headlight. But what would really be interesting is capturing some of the speed energy to help charge the battery. But with using wind.

damned dirty hippies, can't you just accept some tihings need to die in larger quantites to increase our survivability.

Re:umm...why??? (2, Informative)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531825)

    Won't work.

    Well, it would work, but you'd always lose in the overall equation. By putting something in line to capture the "speed energy", you are forced to put more power out to make the speed.

    blah, blah, blah, energy cannot be created nor destroyed, it can only change states, blah, blah, blah.

    To expand on the idea, you could put a giant windmill on top of a car that could produce enough electricity to drive with. Unfortunately, it would take more electricity than you produce to make it move, because of the added resistance of the windmill.

    Now, having a deployable windmill that could charge the battery while you're parked is a completely different idea, and almost practical. :) Just like solar, it depends on where you are, and what the environment dictates. Alaska in mid winter isn't exactly good for solar. Most cities don't have a good sustained wind at ground level. Florida along the coast should be great for either, but you'll run out of sun and get extra wind when a hurricane blows through. :)

   

Re:umm...why??? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531993)

wow. Just...wow. That's not right. It's not even wrong. It betrays an incredible simple-mindedness to even propose the idea of putting a wind turbine on a car to harvest the energy you consumed to get the car up to speed.

Why don't you go invest in a perpetual motion machine? I hear they're just around the corner.

Prayer for Vista? (2, Funny)

mordors9 (665662) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530485)

Any chance of Microsoft getting a version that would eat the bugs in VIsta? okay someone was going to say it...

Re:Prayer for Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28530615)

What bugs?

No, really... I don't know what bugs you're talking about... Vista has worked perfectly for me.

Re:Prayer for Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531005)

Okay Billy, we know it's you.

Re:Prayer for Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531359)

Actually, Microsoft got this worked out all along. It's powered by bugs. :))))

Re:Prayer for Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531381)

Wouldnt such a version just eat Vista whole?

Re:Prayer for Vista? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531693)

Finally... a perpetual machine!

Applications (1)

koreaman (835838) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530557)

Does this have any practical applications, or is it just neat?

Re:Applications (5, Informative)

Bryan Gividen (739949) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530639)

I think the practical application is that it gets rid of bugs and it tells the time.

Re:Applications (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28530675)

This is art. (In case you didn't realize.)

Re:Applications (1)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531061)

You know all those flies that are always buzzing around you, landing briefly on your Cheeto-stained fingers? Now they can help you tell time!

Re:Applications (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531105)

The piratical application involves man sized recepticals and a sign that "Get off my lawn! Trespassers will used to tell time!"

Re:Applications (3, Funny)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531491)

The piratical application involves man sized recepticals and a sign that "Get off my lawn! Trespassers will used to tell time!"

No, the piratical application involves ship-sized receptacles, cutlasses, and ropes to fetch fuel.

Re:Applications (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531419)

This one doesn't, but the technology might habe practical applications. I'd like to see a underwater robot that eats zebra mussels and lampreys or other invasive species. Next step would be a bipedal robot to roam Australia and feed on rabbits and cane toads.

Re:Applications (1)

MBCook (132727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532097)

It got posted to Slashdot.

Q.E.D.

One step closer to the Matrix? (1)

Mitsoid (837831) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530567)

One step closer to The matrix?

or perhaps spawning ideas for Skynet?

Oh sure... (5, Funny)

kevinNCSU (1531307) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530569)

Oh sure, everyone's in favor of bug powered clocks, but as soon as you put a pedestrian catcher on the front of your electric SUV to make city driving more efficient then OHHhhh, suddenly you've gone too far!

Re:Oh sure... (3, Interesting)

2obvious4u (871996) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531187)

I so wanted to spend a mod point on this, since I have them to give away....

However, you joke of pedestrians, what about a more "realistic" road kill or still funny but more likely to be "true" cat and dog catcher?

Re:Oh sure... (1)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531605)

Cow catchers have been accepted by our civilization for a long time, so just put a cow catcher on the front of your electric SUV.

Re:Oh sure... (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531493)

Oh sure, everyone's in favor of bug powered clocks, but as soon as you put a pedestrian catcher on the front of your electric SUV to make city driving more efficient then OHHhhh, suddenly you've gone too far!

Yeah, the people making Soylent Green were bitching that pedestrian catchers cut into their resources.

From 'fly net' to skynet. (1)

Borg453b (746808) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530571)

Favourite part: "This is so wrong it has to be right."

Original - or did he cite someone?

Obligatory (1)

Willtor (147206) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530577)

Nom nom nom.

ur doin it rong (0)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531527)

om before nom

Hmmm (2, Interesting)

DaMattster (977781) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530625)

I'd love to take one of these to Alaska in the spring into the early summertime. With the number of mosquitoes living there, I'll bet enough current could be generated to do something more than just power a clock. Mosquitoes in Alaska have been known to be so voracious as to kill a moose that happens upon a swarm. Imagine what millions of these pests could do with this system - bake a chicken or turkey or even provide enough electricity to power a small cabin.

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28530951)

You've heard of Mesquite grilled chicken.. not it's time for Mosquito grilled chicken

Even better would be a carmine clock (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530685)

Which eats red beetles and uses the red from the crushed shells to color itself carmine red, whilst engorging itself on mosquitoes.

Ethical Treatment of Flies (4, Funny)

ChienAndalu (1293930) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530695)

Nice to see that PETA [petacatalog.org] is already all over this.

These bloodthirsty, gut-wrenching robots, designed by UK-based designers James Auger and Jimmy Loizeau thrive on killing and liquidizing flies and mice, whilst serving the purpose of⦠well, not much at all really.

They even have their own vision [petacatalog.org] of insect disposal.

I wonder if they target antibacterial soap and penicillin next...

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

ChienAndalu (1293930) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530725)

Damn it first link should be this one [engadget.com] .

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (2, Informative)

ChienAndalu (1293930) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530743)

fuck it. [peta.org.uk]

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531279)

Thanks for the site to troll.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531765)

My thoughts exactly. Submitted this:

Flies are possibly some of the most disgusting creatures in the world, and are very common vectors for infection and disease. Mice are a pest and a health hazard in many environments.

The clock powered by bugs is more an art project than any prototype for a product to be put on the general market, but misunderstanding this helps you push childish agenda.

And did you know that this very server runs on electricity, a lot of which comes from fossil fuels. Did you know that fossil fuels are made from formerly living things? Basically, you are doing the equivalent of running your computers on new born kittens and puppies.

They moderate their comments, and apparently will ban people who troll them too bad.

I've only ever gotten myself banned once from a website (as in the webmaster config'ed the server to give my IP 403 errors) and that was for leaving a seriously inflammatory comment on an article in reply to the childlike behaviour he had done to stop NoScript users from viewing "his content".... which meant "his adverts".

You are doing it wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531879)

You are a troll who hasn't heard of PETA?

What next? A troll who hasn't heard of Christian fundamentalists? A troll who hasn't heard of OS wars?

I guess we can only blame ourselves. After all, we answer to the political "all parties are the same" trolls and the "climate change questioners" as if they had a valid point.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531731)

Personally, I'm for feeding swarmy bastards like that to the robots. Follow it up with the ALF idiots, then the PETA leadership. Should be enough cross memberships to take out Sea Shepherds as well. We recycle enough of these ecoterrorists & ecoidiots [consumerfreedom.com] , maybe we can actually get things done.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (3, Funny)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530995)

The universe is hostile, so impersonal; devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been.

The more PETA irritates me, the more I want to hang dead animals by their necks outside their headquarters at night. And I'm starting to feel encouraged to hang not-quite-dead things that are still wriggling... I used to really like animals....

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

confused one (671304) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531945)

Unfortunately, the Ronald McDonald House is like just down the street. The PETA people have a tendancy to take it out on the kids. Really classy of them, I might add.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1, Insightful)

Alrescha (50745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532717)

"The universe is hostile, so impersonal; devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been."

There is a moral difference between "devour to survive" and "killing living things to power your clock".

disclaimer: I have no connection, nor do I wish to have any connection, with PETA or any of its members.

A.
(who chases flies out the window, where they can meet their demise in some spider's web)

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (4, Insightful)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531115)

I'm of the general opinion that if you manage to piss off PETA, you know you're doing something right.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

blueg3 (192743) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531159)

Bacteria? They're not even eukaryotes!

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

Absolut187 (816431) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531305)

I wish some super-villain would infect every member of PETA with a bunch of chiggers and ticks that can only be removed from human skin by burning.. just for the irony.

See how many of them opt to lose a limb rather than treat an insect "unethically"

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

koreaman (835838) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531535)

Actually, I'm betting the ones at the top who have drunk the most kool-aid would almost certainly choose to lose a limb.

Too lazy to find a link, but the president of PETA has stated that she would be opposed even to research that was guaranteed with 100% certainty to cure AIDS or cancer (I forget which) if even one animal was used for the research.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

hazah (807503) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531759)

What's even more ironic is that same president, or someone very close to her (I too am too lazy to find the link) uses penicillin because even though it's an animal byproduct, it allows her to survive to further the PETA cause, making the sacrifice an "OK" one... somehow.

Bunch of hypocrites... giving the rest of us hippies a bad name.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532045)

I'm all for being nice to animals, and I don't normally have any beef with PETA. But that reaction is just stupid. The only way to improve a fly, mosquito or cockroach is to make it dead. The machine only extracts energy from the breakdown of insect organic material.

Seems to me this might be a good alternative to sticking dead people in the ground in expensive plastic-lined wooden boxes so they don't even compost properly.

Re:Ethical Treatment of Flies (1)

Nyckname (240456) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532551)

Flies exist as food. They're feeding the clock. I think I'll call mine "Renfield".

Wow. (5, Informative)

FlyingSquidStudios (1031284) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530757)

Talk about a nested series of links. I had to go through 3 separate sites- Slashdot, Endgadget, and Hack-a-Day, one linked to the other, until I got to the original New Scientist gallery photos which had many more interesting robot pictures. Oh, and the end link wasn't to page 1 of the photo gallery and the links weren't obvious each time either. For those who don't want to go the long way around, here is the original link. [newscientist.com]

Re:Wow. (1)

unifyingtheory (1357069) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532377)

So how does it start working if it gets all its power from flies and needs power to capture flies? If it has a power cord to plug it in or a battery, then that pretty much defeats the whole purpose of the "robot" to begin with.

I noticed in the gallery that the lamp had a power cord. If I were going to buy a powered device to kill bugs it would definitely be a conventional "bug zapper" -- a more entertaining option.

How about linking to the actual source (5, Informative)

weave (48069) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530813)

Instead of linking to a blog that talks about another blog that refers to and links to the original story, why not just link to the original source to save us from 5 click throughs and give the original authors credit as well?

Original story: Domestic robots with a taste for flesh [newscientist.com]

Re:How about linking to the actual source (2, Funny)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531227)

Instead of linking to a blog that talks about another blog that refers to and links to the original story, why not just link to the original source to save us from 5 click throughs and give the original authors credit as well?

Because slashdot is a website that is powered by these clicks. Each time you click on a hyperlink your mouse generates 1 joule of energy that gets faxed to the slashdot server farm using the technology patented by Dilbert.

Re:How about linking to the actual source (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531403)

Instead of linking to a blog that talks about another blog that refers to and links to the original story, why not just link to the original source to save us from 5 click throughs and give the original authors credit as well?

Maybe because the submitter needs more hits on his blog? Just a thought....

Re:How about linking to the actual source (1)

7 digits (986730) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531931)

Thx for the link. Too bad the video is powered by "The video you are trying to watch is currently unavailable" brightcove.com flash player of doom... Never had that piece of shit display a single video on firefox, nor give any adequate error message...

Prior art (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530829)

Druuge ships, Star Control II.

Thinking more on this- (1)

FlyingSquidStudios (1031284) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530849)

it occurs to me that there is a minor flaw in powering a robot clock on household pests- namely that the goal of a pest-eating device is to rid you of said pests. Once it eats all the flies, the clock stops working... so you have to encourage more flies. Or mice in the case of the mouse-eater. That sounds like it might have a down side.

Re:Thinking more on this- (1)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531099)

No problem. Separate the power generation component from the clock mechanism and put it outside with the cows!

Re:Thinking more on this- (1)

SEWilco (27983) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531379)

Nah, leave the clock component on it. Digesting a cow will power the clock for quite a long time.

We all feed (0)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#28530925)

on tragedy ... it's like blood to a vampire...

'cause I need to watch things die, from a distance.. vicariously I live while the whole world dies... you all need it too, don't lie...

always a catch (4, Informative)

iroll (717924) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531313)

I figured it was too good to be true:

Although, for now, the robots rely on mains power [newscientist.com] , Auger believes they could become truly self-sufficient.

I like technology-as-art projects, but it'd be much cooler if these things actually *were* powered by bug juice--that is, more like bug powered 75% of the time, with a battery backup or a solar panel (or both) for those days when all the flies have already been eaten--rather than just being combination clock-and-bug-zappers. I'd be interested to see their average power production vs. power consumption.

just waiting on the soylent green version... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28531355)

...to be used as large features in town squares. suddenly, the death penalty and retirement homes seem alot more useful....

Needs mobility (3, Informative)

Spy Handler (822350) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531373)

This is nothing new, in fact there was an even better robot 5 or 6 years ago in Popular Mechanics that did the same biological digestion-to-electricity conversion, but that one was MOBILE. So theoretically it could walk around catching and eating insects and deriving its power needs from that. Don't know what became of it though, I suppose there were no commercial applications.

Now if the digestion can be made efficient enough, and if it can catch enough food to store enough surplus energy, maybe it could be made to breed!

Re:Needs mobility (1)

castironpigeon (1056188) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531787)

A robot that walks around clearing the house of bugs? I think that's commercial application enough right there. Of course, if they want to sell it for $400 that's another matter.

Re:Needs mobility (1)

brian ferullo (632354) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532703)

I have a cat.

Re:Needs mobility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28532639)

This is nothing new, in fact there was an even better robot 5 or 6 years ago in Popular Mechanics that did the same biological digestion-to-electricity conversion, but that one was MOBILE. So theoretically it could walk around catching and eating insects and deriving its power needs from that. Don't know what became of it though, I suppose there were no commercial applications.

They worked pretty good. Slow, but could catch bugs. For a while we had upwards of fifty of them in the backyard. Couldn't supply them with enough bugs so we released them into the desert. That was a few years ago I'm sure they're all dead by now.

Larger version needed (2, Funny)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531749)

Democrat school playground. Fewer moronic bad-science laws.

Re:Larger version needed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28532525)

You misspelled republican, dickface.

Interesting idea... Let's scale it up! (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531791)

Obviously we don't need to worry about carcasses, but if we can turn offal into power via bacteria that eats it... Think about it. Full-circle power AND recycling.

Great! Perpetual killing machines. (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531853)

This seems a little over kill (pun intended) to me.

Does it have an alarm? (1)

Akuun (1519189) | more than 5 years ago | (#28531929)

And if so, does it go "nom nom nom"?

Great C (1)

zolf13 (941799) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532005)

All hail Great C [pkdickbooks.com] ... and start preparing the questions (unless you are on a quest to paint Deus Irae).

Mousquitoes too? (1)

sysupbda (1502727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532019)

I will buy a series of clocks if it takes Mousquitoes. Transportable at best so I can hang it up in my camping tent...

not ready for production (1)

goodtrick (1201109) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532021)

from the new scientist article:
for now, the robots rely on mains power

Also I can imagine that these "bacterial fuel cells" don't smell very good.

I'll subscribe... (1)

modi123 (750470) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532061)

... to it's twitter feed. Hahaha.. I wonder if I can mod this to a bug zapper that powers itself?

And for the alarm... (3, Funny)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532179)

And for the alarm, the clock says

"help me! help me! help me!"

Also a bug zapper version (1)

tazanator (681948) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532287)

The article also talks about a bug zapper version that uses the power to light UV lights to attract more bugs... so when the robots wanna take over instead of UV in will be porn to "kill all humans"

In summary (5, Funny)

xcut (1533357) | more than 5 years ago | (#28532631)

"It recharges on the fly"
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?